Alltop.com

More news about books. Or, maybe this humor.

Do you ever read a blog post and think, “This has to be a spoof. This can’t possibly be true.” I had this reaction when reading an interview between Edward Champion and Richard Cleland of the Federal Trade Commission.

The topic was FTC’s “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials” where, apparently, bloggers must disclose material connections with the companies that provide them. The gist is that if a publisher sent you a book, you’re supposed to read it, and then send it back. Otherwise, it’s compensation.

For example, a blogger could receive merchandise from a marketer with a request to review it, but with no compensation paid other than the value of the product itself. In this situation, whether or not any positive statement the blogger posts would be deemed an “endorsement” within the meaning of the Guides would depend on, among other things, the value of that product, and on whether the blogger routinely receives such requests. If that blogger frequently receives products from manufacturers because he or she is known to have wide readership within a particular demographic group that is the manufacturers’ target market, the blogger’s statements are likely to be deemed to be “endorsements,” as are postings by participants in network marketing programs…

I thought that Champion’s post had to be from The Onion, but sadly it’s not.

My question: If a publisher sends me a crappy book, is it negative compensation and therefore deductible? I anxiously await the IRS ruling on this, but if is deductible, then I would fully support these new guidelines.